On 12/3/08, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 02 Dec 2008 9:31:13 pm Deepa Mohan wrote: > > The point is, so what if she's guilty of less than civil writing? So > > what if she's got a few facts wrong? If we the public were as effective in > > scrutinizing and passing judgment on the administration as we are on Ms > > Roy's > > writing, India would be a different country. > > My response to this? > > If my aunt had a dick, she would have been my uncle
Shiv, I dicklare... you are so funny! :-) A correction (or rather a caste-ration with an allusion(!) to a prev thread) is in orduh here, though - actually Ma'am Deepa did not 'write' this way about Ms Roy, so you don't have to right her,.though I respect your right. But,.I am Left with no option (like N Ram) to write the wrong here hear. Ha. So what if Kanishka is mistaken? So what if he practiced Hinayaana? So what if his Buddha is moustachioed? So what if he was bombed out, unfortunately? So what if he got only his english rite in the hole tritetup? If we listers, listlessers and polemists were oaf as effective in screwtinizing and passing out because of such exertions, this lust would find everlusting glory, thusly making India into an indifferent country. I tell you - these muddleclass ineffectuals are suffering wayy too much from having too much time in their hands, with too much of workplace provided bandwidth, too many online petitions to signup for, too many social nutworks to invite from, too many list threads from way too many lists to respond to, need to do too many websearches to get instant wisdom... So where is the time to develop ANY critical viewpoint on any dam thing including that on Naramada? So we go by pontifications of the likes (actually dislikes) of Ms Roy who seem to suffer from incredible quantities of ersatz expertise on agriculture to hydel projects to unclear power to combating terrorism to communal amity to what-is-next? Sorry, I currently plan to do a volteface here and it will be shocking... As a foolly qualified member of the aforesaid muddleclause, I would support Ms Roy in toto (ass, I dont have the persistence or the ability to sieve out and see thru things, to develop a reasonably consistent world view, to not see things in black&white, to reweigh ideas and opinions in the context of newly gained info) - and of course ALL her viewpoints too. In fact I am going to love Ms Roy, the great champion of underdogs (and NOT uppergods), much more, for her soon-coming-to-a-blaze-near-you kinda excellently researched and deep *and* insightfully soulful and unputdownable diatribes on: * Why chandraayan, when from my neighbourhood of apartments I cant even see sun, leave alone moon. * How Obama committed a blunder by supporting south ossetian struggle. * India should not deal with Dealy Llama any more. (in line with N Ram) * Why Russian aircraft carriers have a factor of safety of 300% and why this is wrong as a mere 200% will do. * Why the HAWT a better idea than the vertical axis wind turbines. * The international conspiracy hatched in outer mongolia by bavarian illuminati is responsible for Obama's triumph who in turn, is responsible for subject creeps on SILK list. * Why the under-dogs occasionally are shadowed, especially when they are walking, when sun is overhead. * Why India is going to dogs, whereas the dogs are going to kennels. * Fermat's last theorem can be proved wrong using Godel's incompleteness theorem and how urban elite are against this approach, because they are not secular. ... Ah, the pleasures of fully armed chair activism. 'nuff ranted. ramjee, who gives it more of those ones*.. PS: Udhay, this is to humbly demonstrate my incredible capacity to scribe content-free but not discontent-free post. * sorry, 'In which Annie gives it those ones' is the name of a film made more than 20-25 years back - the story was that of Ms. Roy and its script was good, I should regretfully admit. -- http://www.qsl.net/vu2sro/ The lyfe so short, the Craft so long to lerne. -- Geoffrey Chaucer (The Assembly of Fowles)
